§ THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHMy Lords, I beg to ask the noble Lord the Under-Secretary of State for War—
- 1. What was the establishment of the Territorial Army in officers and men on 1st January, 1911.
- 2. What was its actual strength on the same date.
- 3. Of this actual strength how many men
- (a) were under 20 years of age on 1st January, 1911;
- (b) had completed 15 days actual training in camp;
- (c) had completed a full course of musketry, and fired at an open range.
THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (LORD LUCAS)My Lords, the answer to the first question is 11,210 officers and 301,262 non-commissioned officers and men. The answer to the second question is 9.696 officers and 257,156 non-commissioned officers and men. As to the third question, we have no particulars regarding the ages on January 1, 1911, but we have the ages on October 1, 1910. At that time, out of a strength of 257,337 non-commissioned officers and men, 83,088 were under twenty years of age.
153 As to the number who did fifteen or more days training in camp during the year 1910, the figures were 7,102 officers and 161,073 non-commissioned officers and men. The answer to the last part of the third question is that out of 195,585 non-commissioned officers and men who have to do a course of musketry 180,724 were tested in the standard test on an open range.
§ THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHI should like to ask my noble friend whether there would be any practical difficulty in getting, up to a more recent date, a statement with regard to the number of men under twenty years of age. The noble Lord has only been able to give the number up to October 1 last year. Would there be any difficulty in obtaining the return up to January 1, 1911? As regards musketry, the noble Lord has not answered my question in the form in which I asked it. I inquired how many men out of the total strength had completed a full course of musketry and fired at an open range. Could the noble Lord answer that?
LORD LUCASI hope the noble Earl will not press me on the question of a later return as to age. There is only a difference of three months between the date as to which I have given the figures and the date in the noble Earl's question. To give the figures at the later date would mean asking from every unit for a special return of the age of every man, and an enormous amount of clerical labour would be involved. I should have thought that the figures as they were in October would have been sufficient. The figures, however, would, on the whole, be better on January 1 last than before, as we take few recruits between October and January and certain of the men in the ranks would during that time be passing the age of twenty. Therefore I hope the noble Earl will not press me on this point. I do not think the result obtained would be sufficiently different from the figures I have given to justify the labour involved. The strength of the men who do the musketry course was 195,585, and of that number 180,724 had been tested in the standard test on an open range. If I had stated that only 180,000 odd men had been tested in the standard test it might have conveyed an erroneous impression, for there are certain arms in the Territorial Force who 154 do not have to go through a course of musketry. It is not the case that out of the whole strength of the force 180,000 odd men only passed. You have always to take into consideration the fact that there are a considerable number of men whose military duties do not render it necessary for them to do musketry.
§ THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEI do not know whether we quite gathered the explanation given by the noble Lord at the close of his remarks. In reply to Question No. 2, the noble Lord stated the strength at, I think. 257,000, in round figures.
§ THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEDo we understand that out of that strength only 180,000 have completed a full course of musketry? The noble Lord pointed out that only 195,000 odd were expected to go through the musketry course. So that the number is 180,000 out of a possible 195,000?
LORD LUCASYes. The men whose military duties do not render it necessary for them to do musketry include the Garrison Artillery and the Royal Army helical Corps, and it is not compulsory for the Army Service Corps.
§ VISCOUNT MIDLETONWould the noble Lord find any difficulty, in reference to what took place the other night, in giving us in a succinct form the shortage in officers on, say, January 1 last, taking care that no officer detailed from the Regulars to the Special Reserve is shown twice over? Would there be any difficulty in giving us that return?
LORD LUCASI will ask my right hon. friend the Secretary of State for War. Perhaps the noble Viscount will give me notice of the question.
§ LORD AMPTHILLWould the noble Lord say what is the actual difference between a full course of musketry and the standard test which he mentioned?
§ LORD AMPTHILLIs it one and the same thing to have passed the standard test and to have fired a full course of musketry?